The Secrets of Masonry

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by 8311-XHT

 

When would it be justified to blame Freemasonry as a whole for somekind of conspiracy or crime? If the majority of the people in control were guilty then would it be justified?

Interesting question answered thusly:

The CIA has committed many documented crimes against humanity in the years of its existence. Is it justifiable to blame the CIA as a whole because of policies implemented by the people in charge?

That's not a particularly useful analogy. The CIA has one unified hiearchal command structure; one ultimate boss calling the shots. Masonry has no such structure. The head of the Grand Lodge of California doesn't have anyone above him who can tell him what to do. Nor does the head of the Grand Lodge of New York. Or Texas. Or any other state. They're purely sovereign organizations. Even divisions within the CIA have to answer to somebody.

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
When would it be justified to blame Freemasonry as a whole for somekind of conspiracy or crime? If the majority of the people in control were guilty then would it be justified?

Never, because there's no such thing as "Freemasonry as a whole."

reply to post by 8311-XHT

Yes, I think it is justified. Ignorance is not a valid excuse IMO. I think the people speaking out publicly and questioning these acts are the only ones that should be exempt from blame.

To a point. If a person is aware of these things and doesn't speak out about them in whatever way they can-those people are guilty. But in a way, ignorance is a valid excuse. If a person isn't even aware that there is a problem how can they be held accountable for doing nothing about it? Looked at from another perspective, if a person has cancer but remains unaware of it, they can't treat it until it enters their awareness through symptoms or a lucky catch from a random medical test. It could kill them either way but they can't do anything about it until they know they have it. Likewise, with Freemasonry. To hold somebody near the bottom of the pyramid to account for the actions of those at the top of the pyramid without any awareness of those actions is absurd.

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
When would it be justified to blame Freemasonry as a whole for somekind of conspiracy or crime? If the majority of the people in control were guilty then would it be justified?

Never, because there's no such thing as "Freemasonry as a whole."

That is a convenient way of avoiding blame if there was somekind of conspiracy though isn't it? It sounds like a terrorist cell or something.

What is the point in having a group if there is no group hierarchy or accountability? And how can you claim there is no conspiracy if there is no knowledge of what goes on from group to group?

Originally posted by coyotepoet
reply to post by 8311-XHT

 

Yes, I think it is justified. Ignorance is not a valid excuse IMO. I think the people speaking out publicly and questioning these acts are the only ones that should be exempt from blame.

To a point. If a person is aware of these things and doesn't speak out about them in whatever way they can-those people are guilty. But in a way, ignorance is a valid excuse. If a person isn't even aware that there is a problem how can they be held accountable for doing nothing about it? Looked at from another perspective, if a person has cancer but remains unaware of it, they can't treat it until it enters their awareness through symptoms or a lucky catch from a random medical test. It could kill them either way but they can't do anything about it until they know they have it. Likewise, with Freemasonry. To hold somebody near the bottom of the pyramid to account for the actions of those at the top of the pyramid without any awareness of those actions is absurd.

If you contribute to something that knowingly has secrets then I think the people who were involved should have some blame.. this is why America should be against ALL secrets and should be completely tranparent. This is what I don't understand about Freemasonry - why someone would want to be a part of something that knowingly claims to have secrets or in which there is no standard of behavior. IF you knowingly accept that the group has secrets or in which you don't even know the agenda.. and then they are guilty of some conspiracy or crime I think the people who are part of the gorup should be blamed and held accountable.. otherwise it is a very easy way of escaping accountability.

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
That is a convenient way of avoiding blame if there was somekind of conspiracy though isn't it? It sounds like a terrorist cell or something.

Depends. Are all terrorist cells taking orders from one leader? Or are terrorist cells autonomous units?

What is the point in having a group if there is no group hierarchy or accountability?

There IS hierarchy, up to the point of a Grand Lodge. But again, each state's Grand Lodge is purely independent. So to say Masonry is corrupt would be a wholly baseless claim. But saying "Grand Lodge of Arizona Masonry is corrupt" could actually have some merit.

And how can you claim there is no conspiracy if there is no knowledge of what goes on from group to group?

To continue my previous example, I really can't claim there's no corruption in Arizona Masonry, because I'm not a member of the Grand Lodge of Arizona, so how would I know? But I can say that Arizona Masonry has no power over Masons in my state, or any other state. So if there IS corruption, the scope of its influence is limited.

If it ever came to light that there was, in fact, corruption in the Grand Lodge of Arizona, the most any other state's Grand Lodge could do would be withdraw recognition. So no person carrying an Arizona dues card could ever set foot in a lodge in another state that frowned on Arizona's behavior.

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
Why someone would want to be a part of something that knowingly claims to have secrets or in which there is no standard of behavior.

Who says there is no standard of behavior? There are very strict, very public standards of behavior. The constitution and by-laws of a Grand Lodge generally easy enough to come by. There is such a thing as a Masonic trial, and the negative outcome of such a trial is expulsion from the fraternity. Anyone convicted of a felony is automatically expelled as well.

so where should we draw the line? When is it OK to think you know what's going on? When you have met all the high rollers, when you have become the Grand Master? At some point, you have to trust that what you know, what you are taught, is true. You trust by people earning your trust. I may very well be missing some grand secret that a select few have. Everyone I know, have met, and trust, are of the same mindset as I and my peers. If there is some grand conspiracy to all this, then it is the best kept secret that has ever been. Nobody has any idea what it might be, and nobody knows anyone who knows it. What is known, is of such importance to the men who study it, no other grand knowledge seems needed. I think masonry offers many keys that when used with other teachings could produce some amazing revelations, but that requires many journeys. At some point you have to start looking for other avenues.

Originally posted by 8311-XHT
If you contribute to something that knowingly has secrets then I think the people who were involved should have some blame..

but who is claiming there are secrets? Masonry has been exactly what it is for almost 300 years and possibly much more. Nowhere are masons running around claiming to have some secret they cannot tell, it's the people who are on the outside saying that. We won't tell you what we promised to keep to ourselves. It's honor, not secrecy. Big difference.

Originally posted by Imhotepsol
reply to post by network dude

 

No I wouldn't.

I am confused. You explained it truthfully. You understand exactly why things are like they are. Please explain this. It sounds like you have a point, but I don't see it.

Originally posted by Grey Magic
So what's true about the 33rd degree?

Things like This are making me doubt Freemasonry in its honesty to the lower degrees.

The 33rd degree is an appendant degree, separate from the 3 degrees of Blue Lodge,
Master Mason is the pinacle of Blue Lodge and no 33rd has "rights" over anyone in Blue Lodge or vice versa.
All are equal..

reply to post by 8311-XHT

why someone would want to be a part of something that knowingly claims to have secrets or in which there is no standard of behavior. IF you knowingly accept that the group has secrets or in which you don't even know the agenda..

I'm not a Mason, never have been but I don't feel like they have secrets just because they are classified as a "secret society." Shamanic traditions hold that to name something gives away it's power. I've participated in many Native American sweat lodges and participants are admonished to not discuss what occurred within the lodge for exactly that reason--not because there is anything to hide but because it diminishes the spiritual energy behind it. I'm sure that is some of the same reasoning behind not discussing Freemasonic rituals. Besides, even if the rituals are talked about, it would just go over the heads of someone who wasn't aware of the deeper symbolism behind the ritual.

I don't feel there are secrets in other respects either. Every piece of esoteric information I have ran across about Freemasonic geometry and symbolism I have learned elsewhere. As Josh said, it is by no means the only group with access to that information. Esoteric knowledge isn't "secret" but it is coded because to fully grok or understand one level requires groking other levels. It's like trying to "get" Calculus when you don't even know how to add. an understanding of one layer leads to an opening up of another.

Has this knowledge been kept from the masses for the purposes of control? I believe it has but not by the average participant, but rather by those variously known as "The Elite" or "TPTB" . There are plenty of places on this board alone where you can find the published texts of the Freemasonic rituals. I've read many of them. Even without belonging to the Freemasons or being initiated into their degrees I recognize the rituals and understand the symbolism behind them because I have learned from other places. That does not seem secret to me but what's the point of telling everyone how to do calculus when they need to learn the math that leads up to that first?

Originally posted by coyotepoet
Esoteric knowledge isn't "secret" but it is coded because to fully grok or understand one level requires groking other levels. It's like trying to "get" Calculus when you don't even know how to add. an understanding of one layer leads to an opening up of another.

Quoted for truth!

Has this knowledge been kept from the masses for the purposes of control? I believe it has but not by the average participant, but rather by those variously known as "The Elite" or "TPTB" . There are plenty of places on this board alone where you can find the published texts of the Freemasonic rituals, the deeper meanings behind them are something else entirely.

See, here I'd disagree. It's not that anyone's keeping information from anyone. It's that if you want knowledge, you have to seek it yourself. Nobody can spoonfeed you ancient wisdom if you don't have any interest in doing the work to learn and apply it.

reply to post by Grey Magic


You may be interested in a critical look at Shaw's testimony.

reply to post by JoshNorton

See, here I'd disagree. It's not that anyone's keeping information from anyone. It's that if you want knowledge, you have to seek it yourself. Nobody can spoonfeed you ancient wisdom if you don't have any interest in doing the work to learn and apply it.

Prior response edited to reflect that basic idea. And that is true. However I go back to John Dee, Queen Elizabeth and burning peasants at the stake for doing the same thing or the priests being the only ones able to interpret the Bible at one point. Control of information and knowledge is a major component of control in general. Still, you are right, spoonfeeding misses the point entirely. It's about growth and you can't grow unless you exercise.

Is Freemasonry related to alchemy? Do different groups have different esoteric knowledge? Could one group have far far far more information or "secrets" (esoteric knowleddge) than another?

Originally posted by network dude

Originally posted by Imhotepsol
reply to post by network dude

 

No I wouldn't.

I am confused. You explained it truthfully. You understand exactly why things are like they are. Please explain this. It sounds like you have a point, but I don't see it.

Thank you for verifying my truthfulness. It makes the next part that little bit easier to take.

Masonry may not hide knowledge or answers but they deliberately obscure the method of using this knowledge. In and of themselves the individual pieces are benign, the charitable causes, the fellowship of brothers united as gentlemen, even the advanced morality of accepting anyone who professes a belief in Deity seems like a truly remarkable thing. But this type of screening is like a hypnotist giving a performance that seems like he's failing at a task but really he's just making sure those left standing are the susceptible ones.

The only thing uniting the Brethren is the idea there is a power greater then them. They are fed the progressive symbolism of Masonries greatness in a group environment. Even though the Rituals feel perfectly natural you have to admit to the power of them as a complete neophyte. As you progress through the order they grow increasingly complex so as to reinvoke this "shattering" experience again and again. Each time a little part of the symbolism is fed in and amalgamated with individual thought.

When I said I left because I could no longer profess belief in a Supreme Being I meant that I could no longer believe in something as important as the concept of God increasingly in someone else's terms. Not religion and not masonry. I was encouraged by them to stay in a position I was in, I wanted to leave and go to Syria. I was encouraged to take guidance from Priests who were from the order and again they were working towards me doing what was best for the order. I can also say, hand on heart, in my previous roles that I landed deals purely because I was a freemason. It was also not a one off thing. When I started and just joined them I was still cold calling, when I left I was reporting at director level (also a member).

We were never asked to recruit either; no there's nothing as obvious as that. But you know as well as I do there is always talk of some worthy brother that would make a good addition. We were always told if we noticed someone who would be a good "fit" they used to say, to make sure we approach them.

You see I think I just came to a point where I realized that to really understand you have to live it, right here in real life. Not something that only happens when the moons at a certain point hidden away in the grandeur of secret rooms. At best masonry is a method of occupying a retirement with philosophical musings at worst it is a method of gaining influence over genuine seekers and diverting their energies towards masonries all to well known "suggested causes" as I am sure you have been asked to donate to at your meal after lodge has been closed.

You could respond that this is all really subjective but this is what happens when you become part of a cult of thought. You learn their way of doing things, how they say things, their use of words and symbols. So even though nothing is hidden, that doesn't really matter, it's you that becomes it. I'm sure you've seen the lifers there who are total embodiments of Masonry. I just don't think that person is who I ever want to be.

reply to post by 8311-XHT

Is Freemasonry related to alchemy?

I'll let a Mason answer that fully but, in general, all of the Hermetic paths are related to alchemy to some degree.

Do different groups have different esoteric knowledge?

All of the groups that I have been a part of over the years have different interpretations, some differences are slight, others are larger, but the basic information has been largely the same in my experience. In my mind, a correlate would be comparing a Southern Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Catholic, etc. They all identify as Christian and have some things in common but diverge in other ways--largely in interpretation.

Could one group have far far far more information or "secrets" (esoteric knowleddge) than another?

Some may think they do but in reality, probably not. I don't think it's about one group having more information than another but more about how deep a person wants to go in whatever path(s) they have chosen.

Originally posted by coyotepoet

Could one group have far far far more information or "secrets" (esoteric knowleddge) than another?

Some may think they do but in reality, probably not. I don't think it's about one group having more information than another but more about how deep a person wants to go in whatever path(s) they have chosen.

I'd go a step further and suggest that "groups" don't have information at all. Individuals do. Some have more interest in esoteric study than others, regardless of formal affiliations or groups. So there are plenty of Masons with no real esoteric interest at all. And there are some who probably know a lot about alchemy.

reply to post by network dude
My Pastor is a 32 degree Mason..I asked him about the secrets.
His reply was there really are none..You can reserch every aspect of Masonery at the libaraury
The real reason for secrets is this ..If you cant be trusted with a small secret..then you cant be trusted with anything.
We take a good man and make him a better man .
I thought that summed it up pretty well